I am too close to the fire. Both sides of you guys are making valid points even if you find yourself being on the Snowflakes perspective side for the 1st time in ur life. I’m not a fan of Monsanto or Cancer either. I’m nearing the end of my farming career and have sprayed these chemicals all my life. I don’t believe current world populations can be fed with what’s known currently if we lean towards organic. We can try if that’s what u want, But risk a global die off, again Neither side of this argument is totally wrong. History will let us know

I am too close to the fire. Both sides of you guys are making valid points even if you find yourself being on the Snowflakes perspective side for the 1st time in ur life. I’m not a fan of Monsanto or Cancer either. I’m nearing the end of my farming career and have sprayed these chemicals all my life. I don’t believe current world populations can be fed with what’s known currently if we lean towards organic. We can try if that’s what u want, But risk a global die off, again Neither side of this argument is totally wrong. History will let us know

Farmdog I agree organic isn’t the answer, if a famine ever happens because of crop failure who are the snowflakes going to blame?

And Monsanto and their technology fee’s and the following legal issues over those fees should have been stopped decades ago

Those Tech fees, equipment prices,outrageous seed and fertilizer cost inputs that seem to magically adjust with the markets...I’m paranoid...keep us Slaves to Monsanto and John Deer. There are chemicals way stronger than these being discussed being sprayed on produce since the American housewife freaks out at the sight of a worm or worm damage. That’s a good starting point, make yourself eat slightly damaged produce and our world will get just a tiny bit safer. It will still need to be sprayed to make it to harvest, just not as much

Those Tech fees, equipment prices,outrageous seed and fertilizer cost inputs that seem to magically adjust with the markets...Iím paranoid...keep us Slaves to Monsanto and John Deer. There are chemicals way stronger than these being discussed being sprayed on produce since the American housewife freaks out at the sight of a worm or worm damage. Thatís a good starting point, make yourself eat slightly damaged produce and our world will get just a tiny bit safer. It will still need to be sprayed to make it to harvest, just not as much

Yep slaves to Monsanto, my buddies farm had to pay over $400,000 per year in patent seed and chemicals
And the huge rice lobbying from Arkansas and sugar cane from Florida made the farm under the gun always

I wish I could spend the next 4 hours posting scientific journals and studies proving the glyphosate is SAFE, but my time is limited.

Keep in mind - juries do not decide scientific fact.
Personal experiences are not scientific evidence.

The one study out of over a thousand on glysophate's toxicity that said it might be carcinogenic was the IARC, an arm of the World Health Organization.

Here's a link to what IARC said. Keep in mind, this is the same group that said red meat is probably carcinogenic.

The IARC was also defunded by the US / EPA because of questionable testing methodology. Furthermore, IARC refuses to disclose funding sources, which are widely believed to be environmental groups such as Earth Liberation Front and Environmental Working Group (which was also defunded by EPA due to unethical research).

"No health organization in the world considers glyphosate to be a cancer risk to humans at the levels humans are exposed to it." - Health Canada

Another thing with the 3 "glyphosate cases" ...
Each of the plaintiffs has had health / exposure history which makes other factors much more likely contributing to their cancer development. Pilliods' health history is packed with factors predisposing them to NHL. Hardeman's hepatitis B, and Johnson's UV exposure and living in the vicinity of oil wells are known factors weakening immune system and/ or making susceptible to cancer.

I'm part of a one person boycott against Monsanto. Gonna bring them to there knees! For my part I don't use any GMO crop of any sort and have herbicide use down to very minimal and strategic use only. Crops do just fine... even without synthetic fertilizer. Amazing.

I'm part of a one person boycott against Monsanto. Gonna bring them to there knees! For my part I don't use any GMO crop of any sort and have herbicide use down to very minimal and strategic use only. Crops do just fine... even without synthetic fertilizer. Amazing.

Elgato, since I started not disking and use natural tach no chemicals
My field is looking so good only chemicals are put on the edge of my fence
Daikon radish are going in in the fall that or grazing radish to help with soil next spring

I'm part of a one person boycott against Monsanto. Gonna bring them to there knees! For my part I don't use any GMO crop of any sort and have herbicide use down to very minimal and strategic use only. Crops do just fine... even without synthetic fertilizer. Amazing.

We are over 20 years in to GMO corn vs hybrids it should be easy for you..... I can’t image why A naturally occurring soil protein and a herbicide that have been scientifically proven time and time again to be safe, are so terrible when they have lessoned the usage of other pesticides and herbicides which are dangerous is such a bad thing, not to mention increased yields do to better hybridizations

I’m really curious to see this yield increases from these native seeds that are going to lesson our footprint

Cancer or no cancer, this isnít good for soil life. Not to mention it can be found in nearly all of the food we eat and even in our bloodstreams-itís certainly effecting the flora of animals and humans.

Iíll admit, itís not widespread because most are still under the impression that synthetic fertilizers and herbicides is the only way to farm, but there are farmers producing as well as (and in some cases outproducing) their conventional counterparts without either. On top of that, theyíre producing livestock at up to four times the stocking density as conventional farmers on the same farms. All while replenishing and building topsoil and increasing organic matter.

Cancer or no cancer, this isn’t good for soil life. Not to mention it can be found in nearly all of the food we eat and even in our bloodstreams-it’s certainly effecting the flora of animals and humans.

I’ll admit, it’s not widespread because most are still under the impression that synthetic fertilizers and herbicides is the only way to farm, but there are farmers producing as well as (and in some cases outproducing) their conventional counterparts without either. On top of that, they’re producing livestock at up to four times the stocking density as conventional farmers on the same farms. All while replenishing and building topsoil and increasing organic matter.

Gabe Brown, Russell Hendrick are a couple off the top of my head.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Again let’s sees yield differences. I’d loved to see convention seeds averages blowing out GMO hybrids. Please show me. Let’s see the numbers!! You are like the third person on this thread to say it but offer no historical data, yours or otherwise.

I farm and operate 20k acres, On a normal rain fall year it’s not abnormal for me to have atleast one of my 21 pivots hits 300 bushel average or better, and I’m rotating yearly.

I’m all for this huge seed savings, especially since I’m dealer size... before you waste my time I have been comparing seeds and also GMO’s since they came out 20years ago, including test circles for different seed companies... I’m intune with actual historical reality.

Live stocking rates have zero todo with GMO grains, GMO grasses are tiny speck of a speck of a speck in ranching world.

Again letís sees yield differences. Iíd loved to see convention seeds averages blowing out GMO hybrids. Please show me. Letís see the numbers!! You are like the third person on this thread to say it but offer no historical data, yours or otherwise.

I farm and operate 20k acres, On a normal rain fall year I have atleast one of my 21 pivots hits 300 bushel average or better, and Iím rotating yearly.

Iím all for this huge seed savings, especially since Iím dealer size... before you waste my time I have been comparing seeds and also GMOís since they came out 20years ago, including test circles for different seed companies...

Live stocking rates have zero todo with GMO grains, GMO grasses are tiny speck of a speck of a speck in ranching world.

Iím very happy for you. Iím not sure where anyone said that hybrid seeds blow GMO out of the water? Iím simply stating that crops are being grown very effectively without Roundup, synthetic fertilizers, and pesticides. This is helping farmers make a living again because their inputs are SIGNIFICANTLY less without all the money spent on these.

And I wasnít talking about GMO grasses. Many farmers are rotating livestock on the same grounds theyíre growing crops on.

Again let’s see the costs. Let’s see the drop in fertilizer, herbicides and pesticides that these conventional seeds are causing a saving on.... because over the last 20 years my herbicide and pesticide usage has gone down, and bushels per acreage up.

Again I’m all about cost savings. I don’t like paying that monster seed bills or be holden to legal agreements on harvested seed usage... im all in for alternatives. Especially if it means less tilled acreage for same tonnage.

There is no GMO wheat, so what are they rotating cattle on, stubble?

Put yourself in my shoes. I have historical data on all my land and different crops and seeds for almost 40 plus years, I can argue real life because it’s to my greatest benefit to find best option of most ROI with the very least impact. Last thing I want is every inch of my place plowed. Less I have to plant more diverse I can be.

Again letís see the costs. Letís see the drop in fertilizer, herbicides and pesticides that these conventional seeds are causing a saving on.... because over the last 20 years my herbicide and pesticide usage has gone down, and bushels per acreage up.

Again Iím all about cost savings. I donít like paying that monster seed bills or be holden to legal agreements on harvested seed usage... im all in for alternatives. Especially if it means less tilled acreage for same tonnage.

There is no GMO wheat, so what are they rotating cattle on, stubble?

Put yourself in my shoes. I have historical data on all my land and different crops and seeds for almost 40 plus years, I can argue real life because itís to my greatest benefit to find best option of most ROI with the very least impact. Last thing I want is every inch of my place plowed. Less I have to plant more diverse I can be.

I'm glad you have joined this discussion cause clearly your experience and data keeping can be very valuable. You ask good questions. There are a lot of different aspects to this discussion which can be explored but I propose to narrow the current discussion to 'conventional tillage ag' with emphasis on herbicide, pesticide, fungicide use planting GMO seeds vs some of the current trends using no till, multi specie cover crop/ cash crop rotations sometimes along with intensive rotational grazing.

I will try to get answers for some of your questions from 2 sources; 17,000 acre [plantation in central La. which is traditionally farmed { tillage, GMO commodity crops herbicides etc. } and compared to what some other farmers are realizing using no till , conventional seed, minimal synthetic inputs etc.

I'd like to propose a few new questions as well. How does the Farm Bill support your farm and what would happen if the supports it offers were eliminated? While yield is meaningful, far more meaningful is profitability [ irrespective of yield] What trends are you experiencing with profitability? Organic matter is a measure of a soils value. What changes as a % have you seen in your organic matter since you started farming? Do you use crop insurance and how does that effect the decisions you make regarding what you plant, how you plant, etc. ? { No other business I am aware of has the luxury of profitability insurance} How do you assure that the herbicides, pesticides etc do not get into the watershed where they essentially become uncontrollable? What do you do for erosion control? What % of the synthetic fertilizers you use actually get used by the plants vs. migrating into the watershed?

My caveat . I am a recreational farmer growing about 130 acres of multi specie crops mostly aimed at growing a better than average deer. I ask these questions out of a genuine interest to understand as I have a keen concern with conventional ag practices believing the current commodity model is broken in various ways yet there are practices in place now that could well revolutionize farming to the benefit of the ecology, the nutrient density of the food we eat, the soil that grows our food...and the list goes on.

How well do you actually understand the crop insurance program? It’s not as simple as subsidized premiums. You just don’t pick a Crop, plant and go get insurance.

The only real advantage the current farm bill for me is walk in out of state hunting, crop insurance in which probably only accounts now for 60% of my total grains acreage (I farm corn, wheat, barely, sunflower, Milo, alfalfa, occasionally soybeans)and CRP/WRP programs. The biggest advantage of the farm bill isn’t actually to me, it’s to you the consumer. Grain prices don’t follow inflation. Corn buying power is 50% less then what it was in 1960, as with the rest of the grains. But then again you have comparably cheap food prices for the unique insurance program that’s cost you the consumer so little

With out those insurance programs I would most likely be a much larger operator, due to acquisitions of those unable to diversify. But to answer your question I don’t chase subs, I bet my insurability crops wise will eventually be down to 40% within the next 5 years. I’m going away from wheat for my winter crops, unless someone comes up with a more DT and disease resistant seed..

I’m not just comparing my farm, I’m comparing neighbors, family clients, and friends accounting for 100,000’s of acres. I ran test plots for 5 different grain MFG’ers. We have owned an Elevator.

The real revolutionary farmers are the current non hobby farmers. They are the ones actually changing implements design, pushing for better irrigation techniques and less evaporation/less water usage, challenging seed hybridization issues, stoping errosion/top soil loses, etc. they are the ones working for repeatable farm solutions. We are the ones pushing for more substantial production using less acreage.
Why I chimed in on this thread. So many guys running mouths WITH zero historical production numbers to them back up. All regurgitated ignorance.

But back to farming, You are comparing two different things already. No-till and synthetic vs non synthetic fertilizers etc have zero to do GMO’s, Or what you call “ conventional farming”. Infact even organic matter, top soil loss, etc have zero todo with GMO. That’s farming techniques and availability of options or even rotational crop plantings such as a rotating 3rd to 4th year alfalfa to corn/barely/wheat etc. .

NO-TILL drilling is not new......

I no-tilled a couple thousand acres every year, for last 20 years all my corn stubble gets no tilled in with either barely or wheat. It’s a pretty common soil conservation practice. I use both feedlot fertilizer and synthetic. I rotate out alfalfa every 4th to 5th year with a grain, specifically for the soil.

I don’t think you realize what large scale farming is and what it has done in the last 30 years. From a technology stand point I can apply fertilizer and water with my phone. I can run tractor via remote. I can go on and on on via minor technology changes. But end of the day farm techniques are only there to foster and maximize seed “ability.”

Itís encouraging to see an increase in regenerative farming-I honestly think it will save many family farms and am optimistic it can even help start new ones.

If I remember correctly Gabe Brown estimates that a family should be able to make a living, with no off-farm employment, off of 150 acres. Young people are interesting in agriculture again, and itís not due to commodities.

Iím impressed and inspired by farmers who are able to do this while producing heathy nutrient-dense food and increasing organic matter.

It’s encouraging to see an increase in regenerative farming-I honestly think it will save many family farms and am optimistic it can even help start new ones.

If I remember correctly Gabe Brown estimates that a family should be able to make a living, with no off-farm employment, off of 150 acres. Young people are interesting in agriculture again, and it’s not due to commodities.

I’m impressed and inspired by farmers who are able to do this while producing heathy nutrient-dense food and increasing organic matter.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Regenerative farming practices have been a continuing methodology since the Ag act of 1954. Technically since 1940 when dust bowl ended.

Soil conservation was the reason for the Ag act 1954.

It is nothing new. Just a hipster coined phase for their compost piles

If I remember correctly Gabe Brown estimates that a family should be able to make a living, with no off-farm employment, off of 150 acres. Young people are interesting in agriculture again, and itís not due to commodities.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I donít know who Gabe Brown is but I would tend to agree with him. Problem is, few families can afford 150 tillable acres. Hence the need for large scale agricultural production.

Just noticed this thread was revived. And no shortage of attitude present.

Some of the posts are borderline misinforming so I wanted to clarify that per the WHO and UN, daily exposure to more than 1 mg/kg of body weight of glyphosate is considered a cancer risk, and 0.5 mg/kg of body weight/ day per the European Food Safety Authority who chose to be more conservative. Does this mean that everyone who gets exposed to those levels will get cancer? No. Because susceptibility to cancer varies tremendously from person to person, and these organizations are choosing the low end to be cautious. When you see someone claim they saw a study that said it was "safe" or a study has shown that it definitely does not cause cancer, realize that it's per the testing criteria of the study. They are testing specific doses at specific frequencies, for specific lengths of time, and for specific biologic targets. I.e. was breast tissue sampled? Organ tissue? What was sampled? A study determines a result for finite testing criteria, and their determination can ONLY be applied to the specific conditions of that test. And yes, I am aware that many other herbicides and pesticides are worse.

As for the commercial farming topic, I see it as an issue of growing dependency with increasing detrimental costs. Yes it may be the fastest way to produce a maximum volume, especially in harder to grow areas. But, fertilizer runoff and herbicide (that are more enduring than glyphosate) and pesticide runoff is poisoning thousands of square miles of water shed. The Gulf of Mexico alone has a desert devoid of life that is thousands of square miles as a direct result. Over $30 BILLION has been spent trying to mitigate this, but with minute success. There is also significant water table contamination in susceptible areas. And as the population adjusts and gets used to increased availability of food and continues to grow, it will put even more demand on these growing techniques, which of course will exacerbate the negative side effects. I.e. greater concentrations of these chemicals accumulating, more collateral damage, and very likely people getting sick.

I agree, it's all lawyer driven. So, I'm fair complected, used the farm grade round up for years. And I've also had some skin cancer removed. Guess I can make a claim.

I think it's real funny when you read the labels or hear the commercials about their 'organic' style (fill in the blank). My top three.
1. Water - in America, you are better off drinking tap water. The enzymes help your immune system. Bottled water is pure.
2. Chickens - free ranged chickens. Really, does that mean low-fence.
3. Cows - antibiotic free. Right, I want the Ribeye from the wormy cow.

I agree, it's all lawyer driven. So, I'm fair complected, used the farm grade round up for years. And I've also had some skin cancer removed. Guess I can make a claim.

I think it's real funny when you read the labels or hear the commercials about their 'organic' style (fill in the blank). My top three.
1. Water - in America, you are better off drinking tap water. The enzymes help your immune system. Bottled water is pure.
2. Chickens - free ranged chickens. Really, does that mean low-fence.
3. Cows - antibiotic free. Right, I want the Ribeye from the wormy cow.

You can beat this up all day long because it is in the media but you all still want fuel for your cars and boats, perscription Rx drugs, freon for air conditioning and all other products out there that are hazardous in the chemical process to make, waste after it is made or in using the product. For instance gas has benzene, known cancer causing agent still use it every day. I wish I could find a could bottle of Chloridane for termite control.

I was gonna say the same thing about gasoline.People rinse their hands in it,pour it on the ground,without thinking twice.
Maybe I'm too simple minded,but it seems like everything causes cancer.New stuff,old stuff..
The way I see it,I'm not gonna live forever.Gonna die of something one day.Maybe cancer...Whether it's caused by roundup,or the 2nd hand smoke riding in that old Bronco back in the 80's.

I was thinking the same thing. But some dewormer has some traces of antibiotics

ďĒI know of another, safer method of worming livestock ... one that my dad used for years. All it involves is giving the afflicted animal a bit of snuff in its normal ration of grain.

Why snuff? Well, if you were to read the label from a commercial worm medicine, chances are you'd find that the treatment consists mainly of powdered tobacco (probably 80 to 90 percent powdered tobacco, plus some antibiotics and fillers). OK. So why should you pay $1 or $1.50 for a half-ounce tube of doctored-up tobacco ... when you can buy a four-ounce tin of Levi Garrett snuff ówhich is nothing more than powdered tobacco anyway ó for less than a buck? Why indeed! ďĒ

The scale of the subject of agricultural practices, food quality and safety, environmental impacts and solutions to all the above is very hard to discuss with short clips on an internet thread.

Seems like what it must be to go to an AA mtg: Hi my name is Rusty. I'm a hobby farmer and I use glyphosate.And indeed I do, though sparingly and essentially never on plants animals eat.

I had hoped this thread would shift to the bigger issue of many modern ag practices of which GMO's and glyphosate are only a part. Perhaps the entirety of the subject is to hard to deal with effectively in short quips.

That said I'll throw a few statements/questions out to hopefully frame a couple of the issues. Starting with Genetically Modified Organism---The first Genetically Modified Organism was created in 1987 called the Flavor Savr tomatoe. Round Up Ready crops generally were introduced in 1996.Today roughly 93% of the corn and soy beans are GMO. 23 years from never existing in the history of life on earth to consuming the vast majority of tillable acres in the U.S.!!!

GMO's are created with genetic engineering by inserting genes from one organism to another " in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination" Genes have been transferred across species, and even across kingdoms .

Comparing GMO's to natural hybridization which has been going on for 30,000 years is like comparing the off spring of Brad Pitt and Anjelina Jolie to mating a frog with a soybean.

Considering that GMO's in our basic commodity foods have gone from Zero in 1996 to over 90% it is arguable that the health impacts of that are well understood. There simply hasn't been enough time for scientific longevity studies. I would remind that not too many years before 1996 doctors were recommending smoking cigarettes as healthy.

What is unarguable is that never in the history of carbon based life on planet earth before 1996 have Genetically Modified Organism been introduced much less become a staple of the food supply. Monsanto and other developers along with the EPA say that no problem . We can trust that cant we?

In 2015 39 countries have banned growing GMO crops while 28 % allow it. Are they all just snow flakes or could the lobbying system in the U.S. have any impact on acceptance?

Another impact of the increase in GMO crops is the unprecedented increase in herbicides, specifically glyphosate. Glyphosate was introduced in 1974. Since that time 1.6billion kg. has been sprayed on our food with 2/3 of it coming in the last 10 years. In 2014 the equivalent of 8/10 of a lb. of gly was sprayed on every tillable acre in the United States. AS a result it is found in virtually everywhere... every water way, it has been found in most beers, wine, Quacker, General mIlls ,Kellog foods, found in human urine from New York to Oregon, found in 80% of mothers milk in Brazil,....and the list goes on and on. Monsanto says it is safer than table salt. The EPA says it is safe up to 140mg per 154 lbs/body weight. We can trust that cant we?

It should also be stated that there has been up to a 40% decrease in the nutrient density af most foods directly resulting from soil depletion occurring from chemical and tillage farming. Delving deeper into that may be for another time.

For me the good news is that there are many commercial cutting edge farmers that are increasing profitability by decreasing input costs including the use of patented GMO seed and excessive dependence on herbicides , synthetic fertilizers and chemical farming all by working more in harmony with nature. They are increasing soil organic matter thus improving their soils, sequestering carbon in the soil where it is an asset vs releasing it into the atmosphere from tillage where it is a liability, improving water infiltration thus avoiding runoff and erosion plus becoming more drought tolerant and eliminating the use of pesticides . In the end it will likely be economics [ not yield ] that lead the way to a revolution in ag The mantra is being expanded from " maximizing the seed ability" to" profitably feeding the world while at the same time improving the environments water, air, and soil life and increasing the nutrient density of our foods to the benefit of human health" .

Enough for now. I have great respect for farmers. What a tough gig requiring incredibly high capital costs, scale, you have to be a mechanic, scientist, hydrologist, all while understanding complex govt. regulation, operating with razor thin margins and after all that you depend on nature for success. Hats off to them.